I see that the DDoS-ing jerk is still at it, so I've set up another DDoS-protected VPS running a Riecoin node:

198.251.83.216

Frantech/BuyVM this time, with 500Gbps of filtering. It's kind of awesome how cheap KVM slices are these days.

Feel free to connect to it. If it gets overloaded by connections or bandwidth, I'll work with ziip on getting thoseautomatic filtering scripts in place, and it should be easy to upgrade it to a few extra TB of bandwidth per month if needed.

Once it proves itself for the next week or so, I'll pay for a year in advance on it.

If anyone else is interested in joining the game, I can scribble up some quick instructions.

What about these addresses that mine only one block and no more? are the 30-40% of the riecoin mining. These addresses are destroying the coin too?

am i missing something here? ...

how is ANY of this destroying the coin? ... i dont get it ...

and dont think im a green newbie to mining - especially some of the more difficult coins ... i am really at a loss as to why ANYONE would claim that solomining - pool mining - or ANY mining is destroying the coin ...

on the algo front though - this is such an interesting concept that its almost too difficult to look away when it comes to hashing / algo ...

What about these addresses that mine only one block and no more? are the 30-40% of the riecoin mining. These addresses are destroying the coin too?

am i missing something here? ...

how is ANY of this destroying the coin? ... i dont get it ...

and dont think im a green newbie to mining - especially some of the more difficult coins ... i am really at a loss as to why ANYONE would claim that solomining - pool mining - or ANY mining is destroying the coin ...

on the algo front though - this is such an interesting concept that its almost too difficult to look away when it comes to hashing / algo ...

very unique in every sense of the word ...

dev - lets chat some ...

#crysx

Exactly my point ... many ppl. here already suspect simba behind the attacks on the network with his > 50 % network (pool) hashing power. He/She gets very defensive when somebody is not using his pool, because it would mean it is not so easy to manipulate the network anymore. Pure speculation I know ... but this is how I see it.

What about these addresses that mine only one block and no more? are the 30-40% of the riecoin mining. These addresses are destroying the coin too?

am i missing something here? ...

how is ANY of this destroying the coin? ... i dont get it ...

and dont think im a green newbie to mining - especially some of the more difficult coins ... i am really at a loss as to why ANYONE would claim that solomining - pool mining - or ANY mining is destroying the coin ...

on the algo front though - this is such an interesting concept that its almost too difficult to look away when it comes to hashing / algo ...

very unique in every sense of the word ...

dev - lets chat some ...

#crysx

Exactly my point ... many ppl. here already suspect simba behind the attacks on the network with his > 50 % network (pool) hashing power. He/She gets very defensive when somebody is not using his pool, because it would mean it is not so easy to manipulate the network anymore. Pure speculation I know ... but this is how I see it.

If you saw this, you should buy a good pair of eyes glasses my dear! Maybe are you who dossing my platform.... and then.... manipulate.... WHAT LOL

I haven't the time to get to make "games" with DDoS or something similar.

Definitely I'll do some checks on my servers.........

For all users: I have always said that the solo mining harms users using the available pools, I don't care if RiePool gets the 30-50-80% power!

I would just like, I think in the interest of the whole community, that users were using the pools, that's all dear!

For all users: I have always said that the solo mining harms users using the available pools, I don't care if RiePool gets the 30-50-80% power!

I would just like, I think in the interest of the whole community, that users were using the pools, that's all dear!

And yet, this is what doesn't make sense.

Pools or not, miners get block rewards in proportion to their share of the total hash rate.

That's it. Pools have benefits for smaller miners, and it's good to have pools around to make it easier for everyone to participate. But pools are bad for larger miners, because they charge fees that would otherwise go in their own pockets. And, as anyone who's played the game knows, mining is a very low-margin activity, particularly for CPU coins like this where botnets often get involved.

But as long as there are some ways for small miners to play, then it doesn't matter if pools get 5% of the hash or 100% of the hash.

Cryptocurrencies are generally viewed as secure as long as no entity or colluding group of entities has more than 50% (or 33%, if you favor the selfish mining interpretation) of the hash rate. In that regard, any pool having more than 50% is a *potential* problem, because the operator of that pool could choose to discard the work done by others, or prevent certain transactions from going through.

What's the argument that all users need to use pools?

Having a strong *community* is important, and pools can be a part of that, or they can not -- but that very much depends on the pool operator. Operators who just run a pool aren't very important. Operators who contribute code back, help publicize the coin, and support users and miners, etc., are great. People who DDoS nodes attempting to join the network, however, are actively harmful to the health of the coin, because they make it harder for people to use it and join the community.

For all users: I have always said that the solo mining harms users using the available pools, I don't care if RiePool gets the 30-50-80% power!

I would just like, I think in the interest of the whole community, that users were using the pools, that's all dear!

And yet, this is what doesn't make sense.

Pools or not, miners get block rewards in proportion to their share of the total hash rate.

That's it. Pools have benefits for smaller miners, and it's good to have pools around to make it easier for everyone to participate. But pools are bad for larger miners, because they charge fees that would otherwise go in their own pockets. And, as anyone who's played the game knows, mining is a very low-margin activity, particularly for CPU coins like this where botnets often get involved.

But as long as there are some ways for small miners to play, then it doesn't matter if pools get 5% of the hash or 100% of the hash.

Cryptocurrencies are generally viewed as secure as long as no entity or colluding group of entities has more than 50% (or 33%, if you favor the selfish mining interpretation) of the hash rate. In that regard, any pool having more than 50% is a *potential* problem, because the operator of that pool could choose to discard the work done by others, or prevent certain transactions from going through.

What's the argument that all users need to use pools?

Having a strong *community* is important, and pools can be a part of that, or they can not -- but that very much depends on the pool operator. Operators who just run a pool aren't very important. Operators who contribute code back, help publicize the coin, and support users and miners, etc., are great. People who DDoS nodes attempting to join the network, however, are actively harmful to the health of the coin, because they make it harder for people to use it and join the community.

Amen to that!So the problems (with the network) started after RiePool showed up, followed by lots of node ddos'ing as soon as RiePool had more than 50 % semi-permanently. Simba also actively violates licenses with her closed-source miner (software) which only works for her pool. Not a nice community player, more like a hash-power shark who looking for his personal gain at the cost of the whole RIEcoin network.

For all users: I have always said that the solo mining harms users using the available pools, I don't care if RiePool gets the 30-50-80% power!

I would just like, I think in the interest of the whole community, that users were using the pools, that's all dear!

And yet, this is what doesn't make sense.

Pools or not, miners get block rewards in proportion to their share of the total hash rate.

That's it. Pools have benefits for smaller miners, and it's good to have pools around to make it easier for everyone to participate. But pools are bad for larger miners, because they charge fees that would otherwise go in their own pockets. And, as anyone who's played the game knows, mining is a very low-margin activity, particularly for CPU coins like this where botnets often get involved.

But as long as there are some ways for small miners to play, then it doesn't matter if pools get 5% of the hash or 100% of the hash.

Cryptocurrencies are generally viewed as secure as long as no entity or colluding group of entities has more than 50% (or 33%, if you favor the selfish mining interpretation) of the hash rate. In that regard, any pool having more than 50% is a *potential* problem, because the operator of that pool could choose to discard the work done by others, or prevent certain transactions from going through.

What's the argument that all users need to use pools?

Having a strong *community* is important, and pools can be a part of that, or they can not -- but that very much depends on the pool operator. Operators who just run a pool aren't very important. Operators who contribute code back, help publicize the coin, and support users and miners, etc., are great. People who DDoS nodes attempting to join the network, however, are actively harmful to the health of the coin, because they make it harder for people to use it and join the community.

Amen to that!So the problems (with the network) started after RiePool showed up, followed by lots of node ddos'ing as soon as RiePool had more than 50 % semi-permanently. Simba also actively violates licenses with her closed-source miner (software) which only works for her pool. Not a nice community player, more like a hash-power shark who looking for his personal gain at the cost of the whole RIEcoin network.

Interesting. Would it be helpful if I updated the open-source miner? I don't have very much time right now in the semester, but might be able to sneak in a weekend. It's been two years - I bet I can find at least a 10% speed bump, though it's been a while since I've looked at my code.

Probably only ONE user get all those blocks in solo and NOT many miners of different people! This is NOT helping the community!

one4many... I thought that the question of xptMiner2 was outdated but obviously someone still does not go down the fact that we gave the POSSIBILITY, and not the OBLIGATION, to use a more powerful miner for RiePool. RiePool have 0% Pool and Transactions fees and the DDoS problems were born long time before RiePool (no one remembers yPool and early XpoolX time seems ......) So???

You (and ALL) are free to mine where and how you want, provided that you do it, since you have said that he had "abandoned" Riecoin 1 year ago.... and keep doing bad insinuations about us and RiePool without strong evidence!

Do so.... we go on our way..... you do the same....

I thank all those who have supported and still support RiePool, the most widely used pool for Riecoin.

Interesting. Would it be helpful if I updated the open-source miner? I don't have very much time right now in the semester, but might be able to sneak in a weekend. It's been two years - I bet I can find at least a 10% speed bump, though it's been a while since I've looked at my code.

A performance boost for the open source miner would certainly help promote better hashrate distribution.